People died, I'm surprised someone would find humor in that.
Who's laughing? You said you had the urge. Guess you didn't watch any of the 8 Benghazi hearings or Hillary's 11 hours of testimony. Put the tin foil hat back on or take it off, whichever might bring you back to some semblance of reality.
I don't remember any First Lady before this having such an impact as a speaker/surrogate. That's in part due to the direction of this campaign, but also Michelle Obama is just that good.
and could be setting up her own run in 2024...
Ha! Want to see the GOP really implode? Follow our first Black President, with a the first Female President, with the first Black Female President.
Throw in legal same sex marriage, more states legalizing Marijuana, and Roe v Wade still the law of the land and you've got g.o.p. heads exploding.
I just read a few things that are saying Loretta lynch, but with the Arkansas Bill tarmac talk it may be more difficult. It would give the appearance of impropriety, but the dems would could use the sex and race cards against detractors. That would be interesting to say the least.
I just read a few things that are saying Loretta lynch, but with the Arkansas Bill tarmac talk it may be more difficult. It would give the appearance of impropriety, but the dems would could use the sex and race cards against detractors. That would be interesting to say the least.
Sure. Sure you did. Please provide a synopsis of the Lourde's work. Public servant you seem to be. Throw in some bible quotes, we'll pray together.
I just read a few things that are saying Loretta lynch, but with the Arkansas Bill tarmac talk it may be more difficult. It would give the appearance of impropriety, but the dems would could use the sex and race cards against detractors. That would be interesting to say the least.
Sure. Sure you did. Please provide a synopsis of the Lourde's work. Public servant you seem to be. Throw in some bible quotes, we'll pray together.
In the Dem circles who they talking about as next SCJ?
I dont' think I've heard any specific names being thrown about. But you bring up an interesting point. Most people thought that Garland and the lack of a hearing would be an issue this fall. We haven't even got to that. Shows you what a hole of an election this is.
So anonymous has thrown their hat in the ring against Clinton...i look forward to the next few weeks...between Wikileaks and Anonymous i dont even know if Clinton is going to withstand both assaults
So anonymous has thrown their hat in the ring against Clinton...i look forward to the next few weeks...between Wikileaks and Anonymous i dont even know if Clinton is going to withstand both assaults
In the Dem circles who they talking about as next SCJ?
I dont' think I've heard any specific names being thrown about. But you bring up an interesting point. Most people thought that Garland and the lack of a hearing would be an issue this fall. We haven't even got to that. Shows you what a hole of an election this is.
Hey Matt, you should keep your boy on check... Seems like he's losing his religion... Haha
In the Dem circles who they talking about as next SCJ?
I dont' think I've heard any specific names being thrown about. But you bring up an interesting point. Most people thought that Garland and the lack of a hearing would be an issue this fall. We haven't even got to that. Shows you what a hole of an election this is.
Hey Matt, you should keep your boy on check... Seems like he's losing his religion... Haha
In the Dem circles who they talking about as next SCJ?
I dont' think I've heard any specific names being thrown about. But you bring up an interesting point. Most people thought that Garland and the lack of a hearing would be an issue this fall. We haven't even got to that. Shows you what a hole of an election this is.
Hey Matt, you should keep your boy on check... Seems like he's losing his religion... Haha
In the Dem circles who they talking about as next SCJ?
I dont' think I've heard any specific names being thrown about. But you bring up an interesting point. Most people thought that Garland and the lack of a hearing would be an issue this fall. We haven't even got to that. Shows you what a hole of an election this is.
Hey Matt, you should keep your boy on check... Seems like he's losing his religion... Haha
I don't understand.. which boy?
Wait for it.....
Do you mean the Podesta emails where they talk about interest groups starting to the contradict the Bishops in the Catholic church?
I wonder if Podesta would get upset if Catholics started discussing things like why are they still performing Metzitzah B'Peh. Believe me, YOU DONT WANNA KNOW! It's too early.
I wonder if Podesta would get upset if Catholics started discussing things like why are they still performing Metzitzah B'Peh. Believe me, YOU DONT WANNA KNOW! It's too early.
You know what's missing on this Hillary thread? A positive post.
I got one: Donald Trump is worse!
It's a person that belongs in prison vs. a person that's totally unqualified. I can't vote for either. But I hope the criminal wins.
1995 Milwaukee 1998 Alpine, Alpine 2003 Albany, Boston, Boston, Boston 2004 Boston, Boston 2006 Hartford, St. Paul (Petty), St. Paul (Petty) 2011 Alpine, Alpine 2013 Wrigley 2014 St. Paul 2016 Fenway, Fenway, Wrigley, Wrigley 2018 Missoula, Wrigley, Wrigley 2021 Asbury Park 2022 St Louis 2023 Austin, Austin
I don't remember any First Lady before this having such an impact as a speaker/surrogate. That's in part due to the direction of this campaign, but also Michelle Obama is just that good.
What about Hillary Clinton? The fact you forgot about her is very telling.
I don't remember any First Lady before this having such an impact as a speaker/surrogate. That's in part due to the direction of this campaign, but also Michelle Obama is just that good.
What about Hillary Clinton? The fact you forgot about her is very telling.
Not really. Michelle is certainly a more engaging speaker than HRC, but that doesn't mean she has a stronger grasp of the issues, foreign policy, etc. There's no denying the power of Michelle's words and how she delivers them.
I don't remember any First Lady before this having such an impact as a speaker/surrogate. That's in part due to the direction of this campaign, but also Michelle Obama is just that good.
What about Hillary Clinton? The fact you forgot about her is very telling.
Not really and I didn't forget her. Hillary is not an effective public speaker in my opinion and never has been. I also don't remember Hillary Clinton ever going to bat for Al Gore the way Michelle has for her. Maybe it happened but I don't remember it.
Don't forget the guns they were running through benghazi.
Were they using the same planes they used to fly cocaine into Arkansas in the '70s and '80s?
It's amazing how you blow this off. You are clearly a non-interventionist and the war in Libya followed by the gun-running was exactly that. Nobody is claiming these actions were illegal but it certainly was a decision that did not work out in the administrations favour. What people aren't happy with is the failure to account for the policy, to discuss why it took place and where it went wrong. There should be some transparency on this and for someone who is as mad about Iraq as you appear to be it is quite surprising how you simply don't care. Libya was a war of choice that might have even had some merit and there should be a real discussion of the policy. Your inability to be consistent on the issue shows a real lean towards partisanship over any real dispute with an interventionist foreign policy.
Don't forget the guns they were running through benghazi.
Were they using the same planes they used to fly cocaine into Arkansas in the '70s and '80s?
It's amazing how you blow this off. You are clearly a non-interventionist and the war in Libya followed by the gun-running was exactly that. Nobody is claiming these actions were illegal but it certainly was a decision that did not work out in the administrations favour. What people aren't happy with is the failure to account for the policy, to discuss why it took place and where it went wrong. There should be some transparency on this and for someone who is as mad about Iraq as you appear to be it is quite surprising how you simply don't care. Libya was a war of choice that might have even had some merit and there should be a real discussion of the policy. Your inability to be consistent on the issue shows a real lean towards partisanship over any real dispute with an interventionist foreign policy.
What would you have done in that situation? The rebels were pinned in Benghazi by the advancing Qhaddafi forces. France and England are pushing for intervention. The rebel's charismatic, pro democracy, western educated leader is in your office telling you about the plans for democracy... finally a western democracy not being forced down a Muslim throat, rather one being instituted by the people. What do you do? Let Qhaddafi slaughter the rebels or provide support? The outcome in Libya was terrible. There are many reasons to second guess it. But I don't think you can draw a correlation between Iraq and this engagement. One was completely our undertaking with our troops. The other was not.
Comments
Libtardaplorable©. And proud of it.
Brilliantati©
Libtardaplorable©. And proud of it.
Brilliantati©
That would be interesting to say the least.
Libtardaplorable©. And proud of it.
Brilliantati©
Believe me, YOU DONT WANNA KNOW! It's too early.
I got one:
Donald Trump is worse!
How's dat.
2013 Wrigley 2014 St. Paul 2016 Fenway, Fenway, Wrigley, Wrigley 2018 Missoula, Wrigley, Wrigley 2021 Asbury Park 2022 St Louis 2023 Austin, Austin
"...I changed by not changing at all..."
Godfather.
I see what you did there...
The outcome in Libya was terrible. There are many reasons to second guess it. But I don't think you can draw a correlation between Iraq and this engagement. One was completely our undertaking with our troops. The other was not.